This question exists because it has historical significance, but it is not considered a good, on-topic question for this site, so please do not use it as evidence that you can ask similar questions here. This question and its answers are frozen and cannot be changed. More info: help center.

23

I wonder if we could get Jeff to comment on the status of badge requests.
–
jjnguyJul 9 '09 at 13:26

2

I, too, wonder if we could get @Jeff Atwood to comment on the status of badge requests.
–
RandolphoApr 14 '10 at 13:34

3

@Randolpho: I'm pretty sure that @ thing only works for names of people have actually spoken somewhere above your comment...
–
SamBApr 15 '10 at 18:34

119 Answers
119

Based on suggestions in the comments from Jonik, Bill the Lizard, and Chris Lutz, I've updated the badge name and other details...

Sportsmanship: Awarded when you've given 100 upvotes to non-wiki competing answers (i.e. other user's answers to questions that you have also answered and earned at least one upvote for). This could be awarded multiple times, once for each successive set of 100 upvotes you give.

Can we please not have "man" in the name of the badge. "Sporting" would get the point across without the sexism.
–
Richard GadsdenJul 13 '09 at 17:42

57

@Richard: Well, that's the first time I've ever heard the word "Sportsmanship" referred to as sexist. Honestly, the political-correctness-has-gone-to-far side of me sees that as nitpicky, since I doubt women would really take offense to it any more than, say, the word "manhole"... it's more a language tradition than anything. However, if people were offended by it, I suppose "Good Sport" would be a suitable alternative.
–
gnostradamusJul 13 '09 at 18:00

16

This badge should also be able to be awarded multiple times to encourage continued sportsmanlike behavior.
–
Bill the LizardJul 14 '09 at 12:45

1

@Bill: Good idea. It could be awarded at 100-upvote intervals.
–
gnostradamusJul 14 '09 at 14:04

17

It has two flaws. First, it can encourage adding noise to SO by adding a useless (not downvote worthy but useless) answer to questions with good answers and upvoting them. Second, which is more important IMO, is that it'll discourage deleting noisy answers (e.g. dupe answer in a small time frame). The latter behavior is pretty common among high rep users and shouldn't be discouraged.
–
LeakyCodeJul 21 '09 at 16:22

7

@Richard: How about a "PC Mad" badge for 10+ edits changing he to he/she or him to him/her etc :p
–
DraemonJul 21 '09 at 21:41

8

@Mehrdad - To combat this, you could require that their answer be upvoted as well. So not only did they give a good answer, but they upvoted other people's good answers.
–
Super Long Names are HilariousSep 9 '09 at 4:44

4

Should have a lesser Badge for 10 upvotes to other ansers, so as to get new users upvoting more.
–
Ian RingroseSep 11 '09 at 10:42

3

I propose two additional constraints. 1) that the upvote for a competitor must be cast before an answer is selected by the OP. 2) only one upvote per question counts towards the badge. Otherwise, the system could be easily gamed. People could withhold their vote, check their profile page for new accepted answers, then upvote all competing (read: no longer competing) answers in bulk. Also, many users could get the badge (many times over) on the very day it is introduced, simply by going through their accepted answers and thoughtlessly upvoting everyone. The rich could instantly get richer.
–
ЯegDwightFeb 5 '10 at 22:58

3

@RedDwight: A couple counter-points: 1) Accepted answers aren't set in stone. I've seen them changed quite a few times, so other answers are still technically "in the game", and upvoting them has a chance to lose you an acceptance. 2) Users are limited to 30 votes per day, which will limit how quickly they could get the badge. The number of votes needed to get the badge could also be increased to make it harder to get by thoughtless upvoting. 3) I doubt the badge would be more than a silver, so I don't think people will be so desperate to get it as to burn through all their votes for days.
–
gnostradamusFeb 6 '10 at 2:03

The basic currency of the Stack Overflow is reputation earned by votes. To encourage the reputation system to function, we should encourage more upvoting by the silent majority.
Currently there is only one badge called Civic Duty for voting 300 times. Why not expand this?

+1 I totally agree. Voting is what drives the site, and there is little motivation once you pass 300, except for the good of the community. Also, perhaps a name like "Senator" or "Chancellor"? (Hey, how comes there's no "vote of no confidence"?)
–
Quinn TaylorJul 10 '09 at 21:06

16

Maybe make 30k -> 10k... it would take unrealistically long to get to 30k
–
John RaschAug 4 '09 at 18:41

@JohnFx: Being into regexes is like having a Dremel (rotary drive) tool - you see everything in terms of how you can apply your cool <s>toy</s>tool. Regexes cannot reliably count syllables.
–
ArgalatyrAug 19 '09 at 2:14

2

@Argalatyr - What can reliably count syllables? Apparently even us people who are intelligent enough to speak the language can't correctly count the syllables in Graeme's name.
–
Super Long Names are HilariousSep 23 '09 at 19:40

12

The genius of the Recursive badge is that it has no base case to terminate the recursion. Therefore, should anybody actually acquire the badge it would cause a... Stack Overflow. The concept is so meta that it blows my mind.
–
Dan DyerDec 23 '09 at 16:42

2

Oh, and the Recursive badge... I'd love to just see it in the list of badges, the obvious joke being that no-one will ever attain it.
–
Jürgen A. ErhardJan 12 '10 at 9:48

3

Tautology Badge - You can only have this badge if you already have it
–
EarlzApr 13 '10 at 22:23

I wouldn't just use a plain multiple - as it'd be too easy to get the badge when you've got a small reputation, so I might use 'x * reputation + c' or perhaps 'max(x * reputation, c)', and I'd make 'c' pretty large.
–
Daniel JamesJul 1 '09 at 7:58

(-1) On SO, everyone should be giving the best answer they can. We shouldn't be operating on a 'tier' system. You should answer a question when you think no one else has it right, their reputations should not matter.
–
devinbJul 14 '09 at 13:10

1

@devinb I doubt people intentionally gives lousy answers on SO. This badge would be likely to incentivize users with less rep to post good answers in the hope of earning a badge for giving a better answer than a much more experienced/reputable user. I can't really see a downside to something like this...
–
Quinn TaylorJul 14 '09 at 19:12

I like quality poster it promotes high quality answers.
–
rjstellingJun 29 '09 at 12:42

3

Isn't the Big Day basically a Jon Skeet badge? I don't think he's ever failed to hit the cap. As a one-time-only bronze badge, it might be useful, though, since it would stop new users from asking "Why didn't I get rep from my last three upvotes?"
–
mmyersJun 29 '09 at 17:32

11

As for the quality poster, that would be rather hard to get. I say that because in my last twenty answers, I have 96 upvotes, 8 accepted answers, and 2 downvotes. It's hard to not have a single downvote -- unless you post so many answers a day that the random week-later up and downvotes don't affect your last twenty answers (twenty answers ago for me was June 20), and you avoid saying anything even mildly controversial in the first place.
–
mmyersJun 29 '09 at 17:43

5

+1 for Curmudgeon in some form. The name is too good. :-)
–
Quinn TaylorJun 30 '09 at 14:45

1

@John Pirie - for those badges you mentioned, "poster whim" aggregates over time though. Having a "no downvotes" criteria would really harm the Quality badge concept. I've seen people come into a question and downvote every single answer for no discernible reason. It also opens the potential badge earner to easy sabotage.
–
wompJul 4 '09 at 5:30

4

I think Big Day could be awarded on the first time. But I DO NOT like "Quality Poster". It encourages users to answer CERTAIN questions, instead of contributing to as many questions as possible. Generally, we want users to provide answers wherever they have something useful to say. So, I might disagree with an accepted answer, but I might not post, because I really want that "Quality Poster" badge. That is not behaviour we would want to encourage.
–
devinbJul 14 '09 at 13:17

There are several badges related to having an accepted answer (Scholar, Enlightened, Guru) but none that relate to achieving a certain threshold of accepted answers. For example, knowing somebody has had 10/50/100 answers accepted would increase my confidence that they know what they're talking about (not just throwing out lots of mildly helpful answers over time), and is yet another way to reward people who provide an excellent answer.

Here are a few name ideas such badges...

Aficionado

Master

Philosopher

Pundit

Sage

Savant

In speaking with the SO team about this earlier, they suggested that "there's a 'rich get richer' problem with this style of award." I can see how that can certainly happen, but I see it in a different way...

People who strive to provide good answers in less-popular tags (such as Cocoa and Objective-C, like I do) will likely never get enough votes/views/favorites to earn most of the popularity-related badges. In contrast, an "N accepted answers" badge can be earned through technical knowledge and helpfulness, without being tied to a popular technology. (Or posting a subjective/controversial/funny question/answer, whether intentionally or not.)

Of course, if knowledgeable people start answering every question just to "level up" on accepted answers, I can see how newer members can feel left out. However, I (like to) think most people aren't prone to abuse the system that way, and more good answers does benefit the community as a whole.

I totally agree with your reasoning regarding less-popular tags. For me, it's rare to find MATLAB answers with more than 10 votes, hence "Nice Answer" or "Enlightened" badges are hard to come by (I only have 1 of each for all the MATLAB answers I've given).
–
gnostradamusJun 30 '09 at 18:15

2

I hear what you're saying, but this badge would have massive side effect of badge inflation for all the popular topics. Big big downside.
–
Jeff Atwood♦Jun 30 '09 at 22:39

13

@Jeff - I understand the point about inflation, but how bad would this be? There can only be one accepted answer per question, so with 200k questions on the site.. if the threshold was set at 100 accepted answers, we're talking maximum 2000 badges awarded, and probably much less than that? I'd really like to see a couple more badges around the "accepted answer" functionality. It's important that really specific or niche questions get the help they seek, and the system currently doesn't really encourage answering questions that might not attact much attention.
–
wompJul 3 '09 at 21:28

2

A scaling factor related to the number of questions in the category would help ease the inflation effect for popular categories
–
Gabriel HurleyOct 22 '09 at 23:35

3

Must find others name for "Master", "Sage" and "Savant" badges because they are "Rank" for "Experts" on Experts-Exchange.
–
DavRob60Jul 13 '10 at 14:18

Bounty Hunter — Given the first time your answer is accepted for a bountied question. Generally they're harder to answer anyway. (Or as @Alconja suggested with Capitalist, for answering only bountied questions, something like that.)

Unselfishness — For people who consistently post good answers in obscure or low-view tags.

Despite the joking about Objective-C fanboys, one of the perennial frustrations is that so few people view or vote on questions in that tag. My highest-voted SO answer was (still is) a semi-flippant one to a question with a Java tag. :-/

Sure, we post for a given language because we love it and/or use it all the time, but also because we care to help other users of the language. Nobody's hating on the Java or C# dudes, probably because they're in the majority, but does that necessarily make one any less of a fanboy? :-)

Maybe we need a list of some overlooked tags; I'd happily peruse a few to watch (and vote) for general quality of the Qs&As - although I'm not qualified to comment on technical accuracy.
–
Marc Gravell♦Jun 30 '09 at 14:29

2

Yeah, but moderators shouldn't have to artificially inflate the stats for our pathetic little tags. :-) It should really come from the people who benefit from the tag, although getting people to vote (well) is tough.
–
Quinn TaylorJun 30 '09 at 18:19

1

what if lower use tags had some way (trigger, threshold) of dishing bonus rep for accepted or up-voted answers?
–
IAbstractFeb 4 '10 at 23:23

2

Good idea, but I think this speaks more to getting people to vote, than force-rewarding the the heroes.
–
Chris SMay 24 '10 at 18:57

Last time I looked, there was a 200 points per day limit.
–
jameshJun 28 '09 at 13:42

3

@jamesh: Points gained by having answers accepted still count, even if you've already reached the 200-point limit.
–
RichieHindleJun 28 '09 at 14:22

9

500 points in 24 hours could be 200 points just before UTC midnight, then 200 points + 105 from 7 correct answers in the first part of the next day. It could happen :) (FWIW, without bounty I've never reached 500 in a UTC day. My best was 425 on March 31st, I think. Including bounties: 556 on April 2nd with a 150 bounty.)
–
Jon SkeetJun 29 '09 at 6:53

4

@annakata - yes, that is correct. Frustrating, isn't it? Jon had a 300 bounty accepted the other day... first thing in the morning ;-p
–
Marc Gravell♦Jul 1 '09 at 9:47

I like the concept of negative badges - for the good of the community
–
rjstellingJun 28 '09 at 12:24

39

Negative badges should come in their own flavor... not bronze, silver, or gold... they should be plastic or rust. Some cheesy ugly badge color that you don't want
–
Jeff FritzJun 28 '09 at 12:36

46

A ratio of downvotes would be more appropriate. I'm fairly certain that high volume users have way past 100 downvotes, but compare that to the number of upvotes... Also, heavily downvoted items are often deleted, making the numbers harder. Perhaps a count of the number of items closed as spam/offensive...
–
Marc Gravell♦Jun 28 '09 at 22:02

27

I don't think a 'negative' badge is a good idea. It's still a collectable, shiny or not, and (some) people will want to have one. They would encourage negative behaviour.
–
BlorgbeardJun 29 '09 at 7:39

4

I'd actually like to see this badge for people with an high ratio of downvotes cast
–
bananakataJun 30 '09 at 11:40

perhaps negative badges should be taken away after a period of non-infringement
–
flybywireJul 14 '09 at 11:08

10

(-1) I don't feel that negative badges are advisable on StackOverflow. As Jeff Atwood has mentioned, once a badge is given, it is never removed. That means that you will always be branded with whatever negative stigma is associated with the badge. And most behaviours that are numerable will EVENTUALLY be reached by the power users. I have quite a lot of downvotes, and quite a lot of upvotes too. I don't think I should be branded for that.
–
devinbJul 14 '09 at 13:14

2

I have downvoted 153 times and I'm not a troll.
–
Daniel DaranasSep 9 '09 at 6:58

3

(-1) Not the best idea - downvoting is one of the means by which we weed out patently-bad suggestions (as opposed to suggestions that you merely dont feel earn an upvote). The ratio of downvotes to upvotes might be more meaningful, but Troll isn't a suitable name. I like Dans suggestions, but I'm sure there are others...
–
CJMSep 29 '09 at 8:47

I do this (though it may not get upvotes), on grounds that sometimes the answer reached is inspired by, but very different to, the answers I received. I'll upvote the inspiration(s) and then accept the solution I actually used.
–
MargaretJul 4 '09 at 7:17

1

I've answered a few of my questions simply b/c I found an answer or derived one from another source when none of the other answers would pan out.
–
IAbstractFeb 4 '10 at 23:35

How about only being able to possess one of these badges at any one time, but you get it on all sites. The one you get corresponds to the site where you have the most rep (above a minimum threshold).
–
EtherOct 18 '09 at 3:27

1

@Æther: Bad idea, IMHO. If someone has the potential to earn more than one of these badges, I think they should be able to possess all of them for which they qualify. Maybe have bronze/silver/gold level badges, with the next level up replacing the lower level one, to show a user's relative level of participation on each site.
–
RobHFeb 5 '10 at 0:16

Policeman - was first to flag posts/questions that were later removed as hate speech or trolling. Bronze (Policeman) - did it one time, Silver (Officer) - 30 times, Gold - (Inspector) - 100 times. Note Marc Gravell's answer about need to flag rude post - this badge could make people to report unacceptable behaviour.

I like "Unrewarded" as a consolation prize for not getting (presumably) good questions upvoted, if it were restricted to answers with only zero votes. However, almost everyone will end up getting at least one of the other three badges, which would render them fairly pointless.
–
EtherDec 11 '09 at 5:18

3

"Unrewarded" is good. I was thinking of it as "Unsung Hero". Getting an answer accepted with no upvotes feels like it was just grudgingly accepted by the inquirer.
–
Rob HeiserMar 26 '10 at 21:07